Orlando, FL (August
2018) – Respected Orlando Criminal Defense attorney John Guidry, II has served
the community by defending the criminally accused since 1993. Among his
numerous awards and accolades are “Top 100 Trial Lawyers” and “Best Criminal
Defense Lawyer in Orlando” (2016). To provide information to the public, Mr.
Guidry maintains a Blog with matters of crucial importance in the area of
criminal defense, questions such as “Must an Alleged Victim Show Up in
Court?” and “Can I Be Convicted If There’s No
Evidence?”

Mr. Guidry is
now publishing a series of two guest blog articles on his Blog. The first of
the articles is “How to Preserve Error At Trial in
Florida: An Appellate Lawyer’s Practice Tips (PART 1)”,
written by fellow Criminal Defense Attorney Patrick Megaro. In the first
article, just published on the Blog, Mr. Megaro addresses the problem when an
error at trial is not properly preserved for appeal. In legalese, that is
something like “This issue before us was not
properly preserved for appellate review and is therefore not now
cognizable. Affirmed.”Mr. Megaro
explains that “appellate lawyers cringe when we see these words written,
especially in our own case decisions. This means that no matter how
brilliant the trial attorney was, they did not make a specific, timely
objection at the trial level, which has effectively waived their client’s right
to appeal that issue.”

The law requires that any error during trial
be properly preserved. Thus, a lawyer must be specific with the objection so as
to inform the trial court of the perceived error.” State v. Garza,
118 So.3d 856 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). It means that the attorney must spell out
WHY he or she objects (be it in a motion, a post-hearing memorandum of law, a
written notice of objection, or an argument on the record at the appropriate
time why something is legally erroneous). Further, such objection must be
SPECIFIC. Finally, the objection must be TIMELY and CONTEMPORANEOUS. This
means that the attorney must immediately object when something is coming into
evidence – sometimes before and after.

Mr. Megaro then continues with specific advice about common issues that
arise during the course of a trial. One of those issues is the suppression of
evidence. Explains Patrick Megaro: “If you move
to suppress evidence prior to trial, make sure you make another objection at
the time the evidence is introduced in order to preserve the objection.
You can make the objection at the time of introduction by incorporating your
prior arguments, and by making any new arguments that came up during the trial
(such as authenticity, foundation, etc).”

The second part of the blog articles is
forthcoming shortly.

About Attorney John P. Guidry, II

The Law Firm of John Guidry
is dedicated to defending the rights of the criminally accused. Mr.
Guidry has defended thousands of citizens arrested on a wide variety of
crimes. This aggressive, intelligent criminal defense work started with
an Accounting Degree, then a Master's Degree, then a Juris Doctorate, all with
Honors, then admission to the Florida Bar (1993).

Attorney for the family of Benjamin, Patrick
Megaro, will argue the issues before the appeals court.

Orlando, FL (August 2018) – The law firm of
Halscott Megaro announced that an appeal involving the shooting of Jayvis
Benjamin will be heard by the Court of Appeals. In January 2013, Lynn Thomas, a
police officer in Decatur, Georgia shot and killed an unarmed 20-year-old black
college student, Jayvis Benjamin. Benjamin had allegedly stolen a car and crashed
it in a residential front yard. Officer Thomas shot and killed Benjamin after he
exited the vehicle through the window because the door would not open. The
facts as to what exactly happened when Benjamin exited are in dispute. The
police cruiser’s dashboard video of the incident
is inconclusive, the shooting took place off-camera.

With the assistance of attorney Patrick
Megaro, Benjamin’s mother filed a lawsuit over the death of her son in May 2016
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (civil rights violations) in the U.S. District
Court, Northern District of Georgia, alleging Excessive Force, Negligent
Hiring/Training/Retention of Employment Services, and Wrongful Death against
Avondale Estates Police Department (AEPD) Sergeant Lynn Thomas, Officer Thomas
Gillis, Chief Gary L. Broden, and The City of Avondale Estates. All of the
defendants except for Lynn Thomas were dismissed from the case. Lynn Thomas
successfully moved for summary judgment (a decision based on the pleadings and
available evidence before an actual trial), resulting in an appeal to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

The Court of
Appeals determined on August 3 that oral argument is necessary in this
case. The issues in the case are essentially as follows:whether there are material facts in dispute
that preclude summary judgment, especially where the issue is excessive force,
and whether deadly force was justified under the circumstances in which Jayvis
Benjamin was not being arrested for a violent offense, was not armed, and did
not attack Lynn Thomas.

Patrick Megaro, the attorney for Benjamin’s
family, noted that he appreciates the opportunity to explain the disputed
issues to the Court. “This case has been controversial and divisive. Facts are
in dispute. Hopefully the hearing before the Court will clarify the issues for
a just resolution of the matter.”

This incident has
been widely reported and commented on in the press. Based on the published
articles and opinions, it appears that to this day the facts are still
controversial and disputed. The many news articles about the incident include,
apart from the two articles referred to above:

The appeals case is
MONTYE BENJAMIN, and on her own
behalf as administratrix for the estate of her Son Jayvis Ledell Benjamin v.
LYNN THOMAS, Court of Appeals Docket
#: 18-10204 (United States
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit).